Skip to main content

Legacy Application Performance Management (APM) vs Modern Observability - Part 3

Colin Fallwell
Sumo Logic

In Part 1 and Part 2 of this series, I introduced APM and Modern Observability, and dove into the history of the APM market. If you haven't read it, I recommend going back to the start of the series here.

The Birth and History of Modern Observability (so far)

Between 2012 to 2015 all of the hyperscalers (including Netflix, Google, AWS, LinkedIn, etc.) attempted to use the legacy APM solutions to improve their own visibility. To no avail. The problem was that none of the previous generations of APM solutions could match the scaling demand, nor could they provide interoperability due to their proprietary and exclusive agentry.

This also meant they were really unfit for keeping up with the sheer amount of innovation happening in the Cloud, due to the relatively small number of developers maintaining the agents and integration SDKs/interfaces.

To solve these shortcomings, Netflix, Google, and AWS all began working on their own projects to build telemetry pipelines, instrumentation layers, and control planes into their systems. You can see this today in numerous modern platforms, technologies, and stacks such as Kafka which was developed at LinkedIn, and Kubernetes a.k.a Borg, to orchestrate and scale workloads.

Two other Google projects, Open Census and Open Tracing, were aimed at developing the SDKs and protocols to replicate APM tracing capabilities in modern environments. There are numerous other examples. Ultimately, Google's projects succeeded in solving the scalability and interoperability limitations by developing open standards that could be implemented across any cloud. The community (and enterprises) saw the value immediately, and the projects became well-known but not widely implemented.

More recently, the CNCF merged Open Census and Open Tracing into OpenTelemetry, which is now an incubating project with massive adoption. OpenTelemetry provides a robust and highly customizable ecosystem of specifications, protocols, and libraries that results in a highly converged telemetry stream of data. What's more, it provides flexible and scalable pipelines that can be deployed at the edge via a standard set of SDKs, APIs, and protocols for discovering, instrumenting and enriching meta-data.

The best part lies in the fact it's all open-source, so if something you need is missing or broken, users are free to fork or contribute to the projects as needed.


Click on image above for larger version

Modern Observability encompasses more than CNCF, open standards, protocols, and SDKs. Success with any new technology is highly dependent on the people engaging and the processes governing adoption and use. I define Modern Observability more broadly as a model or framework where all the things related to building observable systems are shifted left and declared as code.

Successful Modern Observability is led by the developer, and is defined early in the development lifecycle and continuously improved with each release. It becomes a declarative statement in the code-base deployed with the services and used as input to other GitOps models. Instrumentation is owned by developers. Developers declare in code what normal looks like providing the basis for a massive reduction in toil and churn. Observability as code enables automation in defining and deploying real-time Service Level Management (SLIs and SLOs), auto-remediation playbooks, and literally any AIOps use case.

Imagine if every service were able to reliably report the health of its internal state in real-time to the rest of the environment? How does that improve automation being orchestrated in a GitOps model and through toolchains? This is easily achievable with sound governance, frameworks, standards, and processes in place.

Giving developers the structure and tooling to declare everything as code actually matures software development teams to design not just observability telemetry but also security into the earliest phases of development, giving them a robust process to define "normal" operations "as code," along with the rules for defining Service Levels associated with the services being developed and deployed. This is really what these new ideas and methodologies such as Observability-driven development (ODD) are all about.

In the case of ODD, it provides a framework of governance and process by which developers standardize how they will build a service to be observable. It informs how they will standardize (based on each organizations' — or even each teams' — standards) the build and deploy pipelines, define what telemetry is emitted, and how they will define what normal looks like in the metrics emitted as a non-functional configuration in the codebase.

Because observability is not an afterthought in the development and deployment process, this simplifies the work developers already undertake to service the needs of business stakeholders such as customer success teams, business analysts, and the C-suite. It enables organizations to standardize how their teams digitally transform their applications, leading them to innovate faster and with observability built into everything to ensure reliability is properly measured and tracked over time.

Ultimately, for the mature developer, it creates an environment by which they are able to write services that are state-aware and can dynamically adjust to a variety of failure modes. For example, they may employ circuit-breakers to prevent already saturated downstream dependencies from compounding effects, or they may change to an alternate logic within the services in times of high latency, or dependency failure.

Closing Remarks

OpenTelemetry is increasingly the framework organizations are turning to solve their observability needs. It's now a CNCF Incubating Project and contribution and advancement in what it offers are accelerating rapidly. It provides a vendor-agnostic solution that is quickly becoming backward compatible even in monolithic on-premise environments.

Organizations adopting modern observability take ownership of the standards and practices for building observable systems. Doing so in a vendor-agnostic way means they forever own their telemetry and can continuously improve the state of observability just like they do the rest of their applications, services, and value streams. This is the bedrock upon which successful digital transformation happens. The freedom of knowing your telemetry is no longer tied to vendors ensures developers can take ownership and make technical decisions that drive successful outcomes for themselves, and the business.

As the standards and frameworks continue to mature, OpenTelemetry is poised to redefine how modern and traditional architectures are instrumented and observed. I for one firmly believe OpenTelemetry is going to be the gold standard for all telemetry acquisitions in the foreseeable future.

I truly hope you found this series informative. I also hope this gives you some ideas and strategies for improving your visibility, and innovation potential. Most of all, it's my hope that everyone can find a way to rely less on proprietary agents and more on their own resources and capabilities for building the next generation of applications and services.

Colin Fallwell is Field CTO of Sumo Logic

The Latest

For decades, traditional observability tools have forced IT professionals to sift through endless dashboards, turning a flood of alerts into actionable insight and driving widespread burnout. While enterprises adopted AI to eliminate this friction, most still deploy it reactively rather than proactively ... As systems become more complex and IT moves to the center of business strategy, a reactive posture is unsustainable ...

Ask an operations team what they monitor and you will hear a familiar list: latency, errors, throughput, uptime. Those signals still matter for AI, but they no longer answer the most important question. As Krishna Sai, CTO of SolarWinds, puts it: "Traditional observability tells you a system is running. AI observability tells you whether it's still reasoning soundly. Those are completely different questions" ...

AI observability serves several roles across an organization. AI engineers use it to build, evaluate, and improve AI systems. SREs use it to operate those systems reliably and efficiently in production, including managing their cost. Leaders need it to connect AI behavior and operational performance to business outcomes. The common need is a clear understanding of whether AI systems are delivering the intended result ...

Part 4 outlines the challenges enterprise face when adopting AI observability. The main challenge is that AI complexity compounds at every stage of maturity. LLM-based applications introduce new behavior, dependencies, and quality considerations, while Agentic AI adds further failure modes as systems make decisions and take actions ...

Part 3 reports on the current state of AI observability. Most experts agree: enterprises are moving faster with AI than they are with the operational discipline needed to run it safely ...

When discussing AI Observability, one of the first questions that arises: Is this just an extension of traditional observability or is this a whole new type of tool? Part 2 compares traditional observability with AI observability ...

In this extensive 14-part series that will post over the next three weeks, experts across observability and AI will provide insight and opinions on the need for AI Observability, the challenges, the benefits, the current state, and predictions for the future ...

Amid rising complexity, organizations are moving quickly toward agent-driven operations: AgenticOps, according to The Impact of Agentic AI on Network Operations, a new report from Cisco ...

AI, automation, and enterprise software give organizations an extraordinary amount of leverage. Work that once required hours can happen in minutes. Information buried across systems can be analyzed almost instantly. Complex workflows can be coordinated across teams with far less manual intervention. That leverage creates a temptation to start with the technology ...

Everyone wants to talk about models. Compute clusters. Benchmark scores that climb a fraction of a point and make headlines anyway. It's an easy conversation to have because it's measurable. But it's also increasingly beside the point ...

Legacy Application Performance Management (APM) vs Modern Observability - Part 3

Colin Fallwell
Sumo Logic

In Part 1 and Part 2 of this series, I introduced APM and Modern Observability, and dove into the history of the APM market. If you haven't read it, I recommend going back to the start of the series here.

The Birth and History of Modern Observability (so far)

Between 2012 to 2015 all of the hyperscalers (including Netflix, Google, AWS, LinkedIn, etc.) attempted to use the legacy APM solutions to improve their own visibility. To no avail. The problem was that none of the previous generations of APM solutions could match the scaling demand, nor could they provide interoperability due to their proprietary and exclusive agentry.

This also meant they were really unfit for keeping up with the sheer amount of innovation happening in the Cloud, due to the relatively small number of developers maintaining the agents and integration SDKs/interfaces.

To solve these shortcomings, Netflix, Google, and AWS all began working on their own projects to build telemetry pipelines, instrumentation layers, and control planes into their systems. You can see this today in numerous modern platforms, technologies, and stacks such as Kafka which was developed at LinkedIn, and Kubernetes a.k.a Borg, to orchestrate and scale workloads.

Two other Google projects, Open Census and Open Tracing, were aimed at developing the SDKs and protocols to replicate APM tracing capabilities in modern environments. There are numerous other examples. Ultimately, Google's projects succeeded in solving the scalability and interoperability limitations by developing open standards that could be implemented across any cloud. The community (and enterprises) saw the value immediately, and the projects became well-known but not widely implemented.

More recently, the CNCF merged Open Census and Open Tracing into OpenTelemetry, which is now an incubating project with massive adoption. OpenTelemetry provides a robust and highly customizable ecosystem of specifications, protocols, and libraries that results in a highly converged telemetry stream of data. What's more, it provides flexible and scalable pipelines that can be deployed at the edge via a standard set of SDKs, APIs, and protocols for discovering, instrumenting and enriching meta-data.

The best part lies in the fact it's all open-source, so if something you need is missing or broken, users are free to fork or contribute to the projects as needed.


Click on image above for larger version

Modern Observability encompasses more than CNCF, open standards, protocols, and SDKs. Success with any new technology is highly dependent on the people engaging and the processes governing adoption and use. I define Modern Observability more broadly as a model or framework where all the things related to building observable systems are shifted left and declared as code.

Successful Modern Observability is led by the developer, and is defined early in the development lifecycle and continuously improved with each release. It becomes a declarative statement in the code-base deployed with the services and used as input to other GitOps models. Instrumentation is owned by developers. Developers declare in code what normal looks like providing the basis for a massive reduction in toil and churn. Observability as code enables automation in defining and deploying real-time Service Level Management (SLIs and SLOs), auto-remediation playbooks, and literally any AIOps use case.

Imagine if every service were able to reliably report the health of its internal state in real-time to the rest of the environment? How does that improve automation being orchestrated in a GitOps model and through toolchains? This is easily achievable with sound governance, frameworks, standards, and processes in place.

Giving developers the structure and tooling to declare everything as code actually matures software development teams to design not just observability telemetry but also security into the earliest phases of development, giving them a robust process to define "normal" operations "as code," along with the rules for defining Service Levels associated with the services being developed and deployed. This is really what these new ideas and methodologies such as Observability-driven development (ODD) are all about.

In the case of ODD, it provides a framework of governance and process by which developers standardize how they will build a service to be observable. It informs how they will standardize (based on each organizations' — or even each teams' — standards) the build and deploy pipelines, define what telemetry is emitted, and how they will define what normal looks like in the metrics emitted as a non-functional configuration in the codebase.

Because observability is not an afterthought in the development and deployment process, this simplifies the work developers already undertake to service the needs of business stakeholders such as customer success teams, business analysts, and the C-suite. It enables organizations to standardize how their teams digitally transform their applications, leading them to innovate faster and with observability built into everything to ensure reliability is properly measured and tracked over time.

Ultimately, for the mature developer, it creates an environment by which they are able to write services that are state-aware and can dynamically adjust to a variety of failure modes. For example, they may employ circuit-breakers to prevent already saturated downstream dependencies from compounding effects, or they may change to an alternate logic within the services in times of high latency, or dependency failure.

Closing Remarks

OpenTelemetry is increasingly the framework organizations are turning to solve their observability needs. It's now a CNCF Incubating Project and contribution and advancement in what it offers are accelerating rapidly. It provides a vendor-agnostic solution that is quickly becoming backward compatible even in monolithic on-premise environments.

Organizations adopting modern observability take ownership of the standards and practices for building observable systems. Doing so in a vendor-agnostic way means they forever own their telemetry and can continuously improve the state of observability just like they do the rest of their applications, services, and value streams. This is the bedrock upon which successful digital transformation happens. The freedom of knowing your telemetry is no longer tied to vendors ensures developers can take ownership and make technical decisions that drive successful outcomes for themselves, and the business.

As the standards and frameworks continue to mature, OpenTelemetry is poised to redefine how modern and traditional architectures are instrumented and observed. I for one firmly believe OpenTelemetry is going to be the gold standard for all telemetry acquisitions in the foreseeable future.

I truly hope you found this series informative. I also hope this gives you some ideas and strategies for improving your visibility, and innovation potential. Most of all, it's my hope that everyone can find a way to rely less on proprietary agents and more on their own resources and capabilities for building the next generation of applications and services.

Colin Fallwell is Field CTO of Sumo Logic

The Latest

For decades, traditional observability tools have forced IT professionals to sift through endless dashboards, turning a flood of alerts into actionable insight and driving widespread burnout. While enterprises adopted AI to eliminate this friction, most still deploy it reactively rather than proactively ... As systems become more complex and IT moves to the center of business strategy, a reactive posture is unsustainable ...

Ask an operations team what they monitor and you will hear a familiar list: latency, errors, throughput, uptime. Those signals still matter for AI, but they no longer answer the most important question. As Krishna Sai, CTO of SolarWinds, puts it: "Traditional observability tells you a system is running. AI observability tells you whether it's still reasoning soundly. Those are completely different questions" ...

AI observability serves several roles across an organization. AI engineers use it to build, evaluate, and improve AI systems. SREs use it to operate those systems reliably and efficiently in production, including managing their cost. Leaders need it to connect AI behavior and operational performance to business outcomes. The common need is a clear understanding of whether AI systems are delivering the intended result ...

Part 4 outlines the challenges enterprise face when adopting AI observability. The main challenge is that AI complexity compounds at every stage of maturity. LLM-based applications introduce new behavior, dependencies, and quality considerations, while Agentic AI adds further failure modes as systems make decisions and take actions ...

Part 3 reports on the current state of AI observability. Most experts agree: enterprises are moving faster with AI than they are with the operational discipline needed to run it safely ...

When discussing AI Observability, one of the first questions that arises: Is this just an extension of traditional observability or is this a whole new type of tool? Part 2 compares traditional observability with AI observability ...

In this extensive 14-part series that will post over the next three weeks, experts across observability and AI will provide insight and opinions on the need for AI Observability, the challenges, the benefits, the current state, and predictions for the future ...

Amid rising complexity, organizations are moving quickly toward agent-driven operations: AgenticOps, according to The Impact of Agentic AI on Network Operations, a new report from Cisco ...

AI, automation, and enterprise software give organizations an extraordinary amount of leverage. Work that once required hours can happen in minutes. Information buried across systems can be analyzed almost instantly. Complex workflows can be coordinated across teams with far less manual intervention. That leverage creates a temptation to start with the technology ...

Everyone wants to talk about models. Compute clusters. Benchmark scores that climb a fraction of a point and make headlines anyway. It's an easy conversation to have because it's measurable. But it's also increasingly beside the point ...